Alphabet’s Board of Directors Called Out for Apparent Woke Bias

On Wednesday, National Legal and Policy Center presented a proposal at Alphabet Inc.’s (formerly known as Google) annual shareholder meeting that would require nominees for the board of directors to disclose their past campaign and charitable donations, so that shareholders could be more fully informed about how they might govern the company and oversee its assets.

NLPC notes that the firm recently became embroiled in controversy following widely documented cases of woke bias in its Gemini artificial intelligence platform, as well as evidence of influencing elections in favor of Democrats via its Google search and advertising functions. NLPC alleges that the company’s board of directors has failed in its responsibility to keep Alphabet politically neutral. The board of directors opposed our proposal, as explained on Pages 79-80 in its proxy statement.

Speaking as sponsor of the proposal was Luke Perlot, associate director of NLPC’s Corporate Integrity Project. His three-minute remarks can be heard here, and a transcript follows:

Good morning,

 

It is the duty of Alphabet’s Board of Directors to represent the interests of Alphabet’s shareholders and ensure that the company is managed not only for today’s success, but for sustainable growth and long-term value. However, recent trends indicate a troubling diversion from Alphabet’s core mission towards highly partisan and controversial social activism. This misalignment with the Company’s core objectives is not just a philosophical issue; it directly impacts Alphabet’s reputation, operational focus, and, ultimately, its long-term financial performance.

 

NLPC’s proposal seeks to remedy this issue by asking members of the board of directors to disclose their political and charitable contributions, which will give shareholders greater insight into any personal biases that drive decisions that publicly appear to be politically motivated.

 

Alphabet is known to have a strong left-wing culture, exemplified most by the negative reaction among its senior leaders to the election of President Trump in 2016. It appears the company’s liberal bias has leaked into other areas of the firm’s operations and public relations.

 

For example, Alphabet has made significant financial contributions to organizations that support lenient criminal justice policies and encourage the vilification of law enforcement, which have contributed to the deterioration of safety in inner cities.

 

Moreover, the Company’s history of election interference has raised questions about impartiality and fairness. There is a growing concern that platforms under Alphabet, such as Google, display bias, filtering information through the ideological leanings of its employees. A report published by the Media Research Center found that Google has boosted Democrat or stifled Republican engagement 41 times since 2008. Further, Dr. Robert Epstein found that, if used to its full capacity, Google has the potential to shift as much as 20% of undecided voters. That is an incredible level of power over the nation’s electoral system.

 

Alphabet’s internal culture has often been described as ‘woke’ – which may alienate substantial segments of the Company’s workforce and customer base. As demonstrated by other corporations like Anheuser-Busch InBev and Target, ideological positions can lead to significant losses.

 

Alphabet recently found itself in hot water after its Gemini image generator produced factually inaccurate depictions of historical figures as people of color.

 

It is crucial to highlight that Alphabet’s core business must be technology and innovation, not social engineering. Members of Alphabet’s board of directors should disclose its political and charitable contributions to provide greater transparency into these puzzling decisions.

 

For these reasons, we encourage shareholders to vote FOR Proposal Number 6.

Read NLPC’s shareholder proposal for the Alphabet annual meeting here.

Listen to Luke Perlot’s presentation of the proposal at the meeting here.